MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951048544 · doi:10.1353/vcr.2018.0018

Tact: Aesthetic Liberalism and the Essay Form in Nineteenth-Century Britain by David Russell

2018· article· en· W2951048544 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ann Gagné

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistory of Science and Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTactRelation (database)LiberalismContext (archaeology)Theme (computing)HegemonyArtLiteratureAestheticsSociologyHistoryPhilosophyArt historyLawPsychologyArchaeologyPoliticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Tact: Aesthetic Liberalism and the Essay Form in Nineteenth-Century Britain by David Russell Ann Gagné Tact: Aesthetic Liberalism and the Essay Form in Nineteenth-Century Britain by David Russell; pp. 200. Princeton UP, 2018. $38.71 cloth. It is nice to be reminded of the tactile pleasures of books. Princeton University Press has done an excellent job of the dust jacket to David Russell’s Tact: Aesthetic Liberalism and the Essay Form in Nineteenth-Century Britain—reminding readers of the touch of reading. The jacket has a composite of fingerprint images from Edward Richard Henry’s Classification and Uses of Fingerprints (1900) and is on a raised and textured paper so that it seems as though you can feel the ridges of the fingerprints. It is a lovely way to start a text focused on tact’s relationship to the outside world. Russell’s book focuses on the essays of six authors to explore tact as the ethical and aesthetic response to modernity. The book provides a varied gendered perspective on the theme and not simply an analysis of the essays of well-known nineteenth-century male essayists from Mill to Pater. Russell starts with an examination of the use of tact, which does not simply reside in the domain of ethics but must be explored in relation to the interpersonal, a focus on the encounter over knowledge. The introduction provides interesting context, noting that Dugald Stewart is credited in the OED for first using tact in 1793 in relation to sociability. The introduction also notes that though tact is often tied to the epistemological, the essayists discussed in the book tend to “describe the promise of tactful unknowing” (3), a form that is distinct from the epistemological. Each chapter concentrates on tact through the essayist’s lens: Charles Lamb’s social philosophy, John Stuart Mill’s surprising aesthetics, Matthew Arnold’s egalitarianism, George Eliot’s outrage, Walter Pater’s radical liberalism, and Marion Milner’s psychoanalysis. The concept of use haunts each chapter, and Russell urges each reader to make his or her own use of his text. The first chapter, on Lamb and the Essays of Elia, connects the writing of essays in the early nineteenth century to the history of the conduct book. The second chapter, on Mill, takes some time to get to the topic of tact, although it ends with an astute discussion of the refusal of knowledge and the importance of sympathy. The strongest and most elaborate chapter is the one on Arnold, in which Russell adeptly takes the reader from tact as a tactic in the theory of education to how Arnold’s axiom to “see the object as in itself it really is” offers a critical framework that allows for tactful relations. He also engages in a very convincing discussion of translation as feeling one’s way. This chapter is of interest to anyone working on the theory of education in the nineteenth century as it raises questions concerning the relation of criticism to education, the power dynamics embedded in Victorian pedagogy through interpersonal relations, and the role of the teacher as safeguard of experience. [End Page 152] Also interesting is the fifth chapter, on Pater and his attention to a fleeting or evasive now. Russell returns the discussion to knowing, or not knowing, and the importance of process in the production of art. Process produces a trust in tact, but it also motivates a philosophical argument concerning the place of tactility in art. Russell argues that “Pater’s tact seeks to clear the way, affectively, for the feelings through which we become susceptible to our own experience” (141), a claim that echoes the epistemological problems highlighted in the introduction. The fourth chapter, on Eliot, suggests that Eliot’s “tactless essays open the way to tactful novels” (98) in that both her essays and novels share a commitment to describing the world that allows for a new relationship to the world. The Eliot chapter is one of the shortest chapters of the book and leaves the reader wanting more, although the discussion of Adam Bede as Eliot’s translation from essay to novel is an effective conclusion to...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorian reviewSame topicHistory of Science and MedicineFrench-language works237,207